Politics/war

Obama’s inauguration….

31 Comments

I’ve been watching the Obama inauguration all day. In facebook there are mixed opinions on Obama’s 2nd term. All the Obama lovers welcome his 2nd term and think he’ll do a better job, and of course, the other half, are the anti-Obama people who think Obama will make our country much worse. I’m still on the anti-Obama side. When I looked at Obama being inaugurated today for his second term, I think to myself, “Now, there’s a guy who shouldn’t be up there. He needs an impeachment!”

Sure enough, the Obama lovers would defend him.

Obama did so many bad things that hurt America. Why does he deserve an impeachment? The list is too long… “Operation: Fast and Furious”, Benghazi, he could be a possible immigrant, and I can go on all day. There are too many things that Obama supporters don’t know about and they seem to ignore all the evil things Obama did in the past. The best defense they can come up with, “Is Bush any better?”

It’s not about who’s better or who’s worse. Any president that does bad things in their presidency, doesn’t deserve to be in office. I want a good president in office. Someone that we can trust and do their jobs right and we haven’t had a good president in years. Reagan was lousy. Kennedy was lousy. Clinton was lousy. Even George H.W. Bush (W’s father) was lousy too. Each one of them has put this country to shame.

Obama is a guy we can’t trust. A guy who has gotten away with so much things. And here he is, in D.C. getting inaugurated.

His speech today was laughable too. It’s not equal opportunity, when he’s going to take our gun rights away and infringe the constitution when he swore in to defend it today. The man is a liar, and untrustworthy. He shouldn’t be out there in D.C. today, when he should be exposed for the tyrant that he really is.

Kev

31 thoughts on “Obama’s inauguration….”

    1. So what made Clinton a bad president other than his affair with Lewinski? Oh man, where do I begin? Lets start off with this one, Clinton pardoning people that were pretty questionable, this stuff sparked some controversy:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardons_controversy

      Like most presidents, he didn’t do anything to make this country better. Clinton also had a hand in worsen the economy. Clinton was also partly responsible for 9/11 and why Bin Laden went out in hiding. We also never had the recession under the Clinton name, that people wrongfully thought we had. And if you want another reason why he was a bad president, look up china gate. Yep, Clinton was just as bad as Obama and George W.

      As for H.W. Bush, he brought us into the Persian Gulf War, and he promised not to raise taxes, but he did anyway. He failed to keep his promises with his legendary, “Read my lips, No new taxes” catchphrase. He also might have a connection with the JFK assassination and may have been responsible for it.

      I’m sure there’s more of an explanation but wanted to keep them short and simple.

      Kev

  2. Well, you’re pretty much SOL having a president that you will like if you can’t find one out of that batch that you think was any good.

    1. There were good presidents but mostly the earlier ones. For starters, a few of my favorites were George Washington of course, Abe Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. They were the good guys. We’ve only had very few good presidents out of the 44 we’ve had.

      Kev

  3. George Washington owned slaves, which means he took a hand in beating and torturing human beings into submission. Abe Lincoln killed Indians. Andrew Jackson killed LOTS of Indians. FDR wanted nothing to do with WWII until Pearl Harbor drew us into it, and his philosophies and policies mirror Obama’s. Look it up.

      1. And he did it without trials and without cause or evidence. And there was no set time for their detainment or for their release.

        In other words, their detention was indefinite. Hm…indefinite detention…now where have we heard that one before?

    2. “George Washington owned slaves, which means he took a hand in beating and torturing human beings into submission.”

      True but that’s because his father did and George took over when his father died. Later on though, George then opposed to slavery and was against it. He freed his slaves after the United States won in the Revolutionary War which makes him a good guy. He felt bad for owning those slaves and no longer wanted any part of it.
      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington

      Abe Lincoln killed Indians.

      And for good reason too! Abe Lincoln never hated Indians, actually. He actually welcomed them. The reason Abe killed Indians is because the Sioux killed several hundred white settlers shortly after Lincoln signed “The Homestead Act” into law. He was just seeking justice for those that were killed.
      Source: http://indigenouspolicy.org/Articles/VolXXNo3/TheIndianPolicyofAbrahamLincoln/tabid/65/Default.aspx

      Andrew Jackson killed LOTS of Indians.

      Again for good reason! Andrew Jackson signed the “Indian Removal Act” into law so the Indians can give up their lands in the Mississippi in exchange for West Lands. Andrew thought this move would be good for the Indians, but they didn’t like it. They didn’t want to leave their lands, so it gave Andrew no choice but to make them leave by force…
      Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html

      FDR wanted nothing to do with WWII until Pearl Harbor drew us into it, and his philosophies and policies mirror Obama’s.

      That’s true, he wanted nothing to do with WWII until Pearl Harbor was attacked. Nobody knows why he didn’t want the US involved in WWII until then as it’s always been a mystery…but what made FDR great was that he got us out of the Great Depression and improved the US on many other things. Even though he tried to stop Hitler before Hitler killed himself, it still made FDR a hero. FDR was one of the best presidents we ever had, in my opinion.

      Kev

      1. Oh, Jesus. You really think that it was good to relocate Native Americans against their wishes? Really?

  4. So why couldnt jackson just use the land in the west? If the indians didnt want to keave their land, then why make them? If there was other land available, shouldnt we just have used that instead of forcing others out of what was rightfully theirs to begin with?

  5. I think it’s really cool you looked that up before replying. Very cool and respectable of you, man.

    But George Washington didn’t free his slaves until he died in his will, and didn’t change his opinion on slavery until the end of his life. Until then he was torturing slaves. Not a good guy until he was dead.

    Lincoln and Jackson killed Indians for good reason? Can you hear yourself? The Homestead and Indian Removal Acts were nothing more than racist reasoning during Manifest Destiny to commit genocide of the Native American so the white man could take all their land from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The Sioux were only fighting back against white settlers killing them at will. And Native Americans knew Jackson was full of shit too so no, they didn’t like getting scammed out of their homeland AGAIN. Go figure.

    The U.S. wanted nothing to do with WWII because it would cost money and resources. No one gave a damn about Nazis and gas chambers until Japan fired on us first. FDR, who’s views I agree with, helped get us out of the Great Depression by putting more federal regulations on the forces that drive our economy. In other words he didn’t want capitalism to run rampant, which today’s conservatives and Tea Party does want. But what really ended the Great Depression was entering into WWII. That war put everyone to work, home and abroad. And FDR wanted nothing to do with the war until we were forced into it. Neither did the U.K.

    Back to Obama. I think everyone knows Bengazi was handled poorly, but impeach Obama for that? For not having enough guards at 1 embassy? That’s reaching. And Fast and Furious was a giant blunder too, but not an evil act. Just very poorly managed. No president can get everything right. But Obama is not helping make the rich richer and the poor poorer. He’s not advocating for torture. He’s helping the police by making some guns illegal. He killed Kadafi and Bin Laden. He stopped us from going into a Greater Depression just as W. Bush left. He’s getting health care to the middle class and the poor with no pre existing conditions. I suppose you have a problem with all of this.

    1. Try to remember that Indians weren’t actual citizens back then, and Andrew never hated Indians, he adopted an Indian son, I believe.

      Kev

      1. Also, the reason Andrew wanted the lands of the Mississippi, was so more whites can live on it, build more towns and all that stuff. I think he saw it as an economic opportunity.

        Kev

      2. Back to Obama. I think everyone knows Bengazi was handled poorly, but impeach Obama for that? For not having enough guards at 1 embassy?

        4 Americans were killed. He didn’t even acknowledge them and acted like that never happened. He continues to act like Benghazi never happened which brings up the suspicion that he may have been responsible for that attack.

        And Fast and Furious was a giant blunder too, but not an evil act. Just very poorly managed. No president can get everything right.

        Yeah, selling guns and various firearms to Mexican drug lords which ended in gun violence that killed patrol agent, Bryan Terry, is not an evil act. Yeah, okay.

        He killed Kadafi and Bin Laden. He stopped us from going into a Greater Depression just as W. Bush left. He’s getting health care to the middle class and the poor with no pre existing conditions. I suppose you have a problem with all of this.

        I wish people would stop giving credit for Obama on killing those people. Yes, they were bad people but Obama doesn’t deserve the credit. Gaddafi was killed by Libyan NTC fighters and Bin Laden was killed by Seal Team 6. The United States had nothing to do with the killing of Gaddafi.

        As far as Bin Laden goes, not only that the Seal Team 6 deserves more credit than Obama, the American people deserve more credit too. Obama is an arrogant and egotistical piece of shit who thinks he did it all for himself.

        He stopped us from going into a Greater Depression just as W. Bush left. He’s getting health care to the middle class and the poor with no pre existing conditions. I suppose you have a problem with all of this.

        Last time I checked, our economics is still a huge mess. Unemployment rate is still high, taxes are way up, etc. He’s not going to make the next 4 years better. We’ll get worse.

        Kev

      3. Kev, c’mon. The US government willfully took part in the near extinction of an entire race over many years. I don’t care if they were US citizens or not. And I’m not going to research if Andrew Jackson had an Indian son because I already know for a fact he had thousands and thousands and thousands of them killed for not leaving their homes quickly enough. I don’t know how he felt about Native Americans but I know what he did to Native Americans.

        I’ll add that today, on US soil, our rights and laws apply to citizen and alien alike. You can’t kill someone and have it be ok just because they’re an alien.

      4. George washington, thomas jefferson, benjamin franklin…none of them were citizens when they got here either.

      5. George washington, thomas jefferson, benjamin franklin…none of them were citizens when they got here either.

        You’re an idiot, bro.

        When George Washington was born, the United States didn’t exist back then, so of course, he wasn’t a citizen yet, even if he was born in West Moreland County, Virginia. George was elected President in 1732, and the law where a “US Citizen” is eligible to be elected in office didn’t take effect ’til 1787.

        Of course, Ben Franklin wasn’t citizen at first ’cause he was the Founding Father of the United States, duh, ya think?

        Same with Jefferson, he was born at the time the US wasn’t yet a colony.

        What you posted, doesn’t make a bit of sense.

        See? I know my history and politics. You guys try to look smarter than me, but you fail every time.

        Kev

      6. you completely missed my point there. if anyone was entitled to citizenship
        of the land it was the indians. we came over here and declared ourselves citizens and then began the process of. eliminating. the native rssidents.

        what is so hard to get that?

  6. There were good presidents but mostly the earlier ones. For starters, a few of my favorites were George Washington of course, Abe Lincoln, Andrew Jackson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. They were the good guys.

    Kev

    And were you alive when any of these were presidents ? Nope.

    1. Nope. I wasn’t alive back then, of course, none of us were, but I’m 100% sure we had to learn all this stuff during high school. I had decent grades for history and social studies, which were my favorite subjects to learn in school. I’m still sort of a history buff as you can probably tell.

      Kev

    2. Were YOU alive when any of them were President? WTF kind of argument is that? The fact of the matter this-Many, many Europeans were NOT happy with their government or their conditions in their home lands. So they got on boats,found new lands-lands that were already inhabited by peaceful people-and they forced them off of those lands. Those that refused to leave were slaughtered.

      Then the Europeans (the white man) declared their independence and called this land that they stole and took by force a country. They wrote a constitution and formed a government. Now, the killing and slaughter and taking over of already inhabited lands didn’t really happen until the Europeans (white man) formed a government. Up[ until that point, everyone seemed to get along just fine.

      So what I would like to know is this-

      1. if the europeans (white man) were so unhappy with their oppressive government, why didn’t they just try to overthrow them? Take control and make things better at home? Wouldn’t that have been the logical thing to do? and…

      2. Since the europeans (white man) that all came over here knew what it was like to live under such tyrannical rule, why would they come over here and impose far more tyrannical rule than what they were living under?There were no mass slaughters in Europe. There was no driving entire villages or groups from their land. and

      3. What gives one group of man (white man) the right to drive another group of man (redskin) from their native lands?

      I will be very, VERY impressed if you can answer those three questions. In fact, I would love to hear your opinion on the those three things.

      You claim that the Indians were not citizens. But in fact, they WERE citizens. They were rightful and ca. just citizens of North America. It may not have been a country inn the sens that Great Britain was a country. or that Germany or France or Canada are countries. But they were indeed native and natural born citizens of a free land. And they had their own from of government. They had their Chiefs, and tribal leaders and their own laws and judicial system. Yet, they were slaughtered by invading immigrants. They were driven from their homes and from their lands by invading immigrants. Men, women and children-native and natural born citizens of a free land-were slaughtered mercilessly by invading immigrants, all in the name of freedom, independence and ending tyranny and oppression.

      I doubt you’ll publish this, as you won’t be able to answer it.

      1. You claim that the Indians were not citizens. But in fact, they WERE citizens. They were rightful and ca. just citizens of North America. It may not have been a country inn the sens that Great Britain was a country. or that Germany or France or Canada are countries. But they were indeed native and natural born citizens of a free land. And they had their own from of government. They had their Chiefs, and tribal leaders and their own laws and judicial system. Yet, they were slaughtered by invading immigrants. They were driven from their homes and from their lands by invading immigrants. Men, women and children-native and natural born citizens of a free land-were slaughtered mercilessly by invading immigrants, all in the name of freedom, independence and ending tyranny and oppression.

        You really are a delusional and arrogant piece of shit, who don’t even get your facts right, either. You must remember that back in those days, it was hard for people to grant US Citizenship, especially Indians which made Citizenship harder for them. They weren’t allowed citizenship until the “Indian Citizenship Act” was passed in 1924.

        Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act_of_1924

        Kev

      2. 3. What gives one group of man (white man) the right to drive another group of man (redskin) from their native lands?

        Again, back then, it was different than it is now. Back in those days, there was no such law as hate crime or racism, so for white people in the 1800’s, it was okay to hate other people that wasn’t in their own race whether it will be Indians, blacks, etc. Racism wasn’t a crime back then, that’s why that behavior was so big back in the day. It may seem terrible to us now, but the whites saw no problem taking control of those people.

        And another thing, what people don’t understand about Andrew Jackson, is that he was pretty much a warrior of a president. He was one of the very few who walked around with a sword every where he went and he was the type of president who didn’t take shit from anybody. The man was aggressive and wasn’t afraid to get what he wants, even if it meant reacting with violence and force.

        I wouldn’t call Andrew Jackson an evil president ’cause that’s how those people were back in the 1800’s. Murder wasn’t considered criminal back then either.

        Kev

  7. In reply about Andrew Jackson, the Mississippi, and economic opportunity:

    How would you like it if Walmart came along and tore down your house to build a store? And what if you went to the police about it, and they told you to leave now or they’d shoot you and your family? But your house was just a prime location for Walmart, a good economic opportunity for them. Same thing, man.

    1. Back then, things were different, people have a hard time understanding that. If Andrew, never did the “Indian Removal” act, imagine how much different the United States would be today. The Trail of Tears maybe scary stuff, but Andrew had his reasons.

      Kev

      1. What he did maybe dark and controversial, but anything it takes for a better future in America. Like Andrew Jackson or not, he had a big hand in shaping America for what it is today. Think about it.

        Kev

      2. I agree with you that Jackson’s actions ultimately benefited the US to grow in territory and economically. That is an argument that you will win.

        And like I said, Bengazi was poorly handled by Obama. But it’s not going to get him impeached. You conservatives would have Obama impeached for having too many potholes on your street.

        The Obama administration did not mean for Fast And Furious to go down the way it did. It was a disaster. But Obama does not get the credit for starting the program. That would go to George W. Bush. Guns fell into the wrong hands. Obama fucked that one up, but he didn’t intentionally do anything evil. What would that gain for him?

        Obama certainly deserves credit for the deaths of Kadafi and Bin Laden. Obama threw Kadafi to the wrath of his own people he’d been shitting on for decades. He commanded the unit that killed Bin Laden. If the unit had failed, Obama would be blamed for the failure…by you. So since it worked, Obama gets the cred. Sorry, you won’t win on this one.

        And last time I checked, no one could undo what W. Bush did to the economy of this country in 1 term. The last I checked if Obama didn’t bail out the auto industry and the banks and everyone else, there wouldn’t BE any economy. Unemployment is falling, taxes are going up for the rich like they were in the 90’s, and the war in Iraq is over (for us). To borrow a term from your side, it’s time to stay the course.

        I respect your opinion though, except for the Native American stuff.

      3. I almost forgot:

        If you’re going to use the “Back then, things were different,” argument for the extermination of the Native American, then I’m going to use it for the 2nd Amendment. Back then things were different. In colonial times local militias made sense just in case the government became a dictatorship. Now that the US is the leader of the free and civilized world, people don’t need guns anymore. That’s what we have police and a military for. No more guns for civilians.

        So now you have to agree with me on gun control, or admit that the killing of the Native American by the US was evil and completely wrong. Watch out how you debate, sir.

  8. So how then is how bunch of europeans came over to north america and killing and relocating the the native people who had been there for hundreds of any different than what is going on with the jews and palestinians?

  9. I agree with you that Jackson’s actions ultimately benefited the US to grow in territory and economically. That is an argument that you will win.

    ~Anonymous

    And Jew action towards the Palestinians ultimately benefits the Jews.

    Killing thousands of innocents may have benefited the Country, but is that really the way to go about things? Does that make it right? maybe we should storm Canada and Mexico next. Not really sure what Canada has besides Rush and moose, but at least in Mexico we could get rid of those pesky drug cartels.

  10. I’m closing this. This has gone far enough. Get over your fucking self, Howdy. You’re not better or smarter than me.

    Kev

Comments are closed.